Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

FortWorth+Sports=Reality?


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

Poll: Would you like a pro team (any kind) in Fort Worth someday? (31 member(s) have cast votes)

Would you like a pro team (any kind) in Fort Worth someday?

  1. YES for NFL (2 votes [6.45%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.45%

  2. YES for NBA (3 votes [9.68%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.68%

  3. YES for NHL (3 votes [9.68%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.68%

  4. YES for MLB (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. YES for "I'll take what we can get" (7 votes [22.58%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.58%

  6. NO for "No team at all" (10 votes [32.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 32.26%

  7. Undecided or Don't Care for it (6 votes [19.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.35%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 02 February 2005 - 08:14 PM

Hey Everybody

I'm suprised there isn't a thread about a desire to see a pro team in Fort Worth. I noticed the topic does get brought up from time to time on other threads, but not one dedicated entirely to it.
Now I got to ask everyone "Do you see a pro team in FW's future?"
We are bigger than most cities that already have teams. So why are we only settling for minor league (Brahmas, Cats)?
Of course Dallas has its teams, but even Arlington (as soon as the Cowboys move in) will have a total of two! :o
Why are we being ignored by the pros? We are in the top 20 of the U.S. biggest cities. We got skyscrapers, large population, great entertainment. Wouldn't that be enough to attract a franchise to town?
Maybe the question is "What is FW MISSING that other cities have to bring a team to town?" It seems everytime I ask people around me why we don't have pro sports in FW, all I get is the negatives responses. Gee, where are all the positive people at? lol

Although a team isn't the heart and soul of a city, it does put the name out there.
If you a big sports fan, when you hear the name of a city like Green Bay or Portland, what comes to mind? (Unless you been there) do you think of its downtown, people, famous landmarks? Nah, you think of the Packers and Trailblazers sport teams.

Can anyone in the forum give me any reason why we can't have our own home team? :(

#2 gdvanc

gdvanc
  • Guests

Posted 03 February 2005 - 02:32 AM

Hey Everybody

View Post


Hey, DrkLts


Now I got to ask everyone "Do you see a pro team in FW's future?"

View Post


How far in the future? Long term, anything can happen.


We are bigger than most cities that already have teams. So why are we only settling for minor league (Brahmas, Cats)?

View Post


Because there isn't much of a shot at getting a big-leage team right now. There are several critical factors over which "we" as a community have no control.


Of course Dallas has its teams, but even Arlington (as soon as the Cowboys move in) will have a total of two!  :o

View Post


Pro sports teams are regional entertainment. Arlington is just the suburb where the Rangers play. Arlington couldn't support the team on its own. It's size is basically irrelevant. It has a good location in a large metropolitan area.


Why are we being ignored by the pros?

View Post


We're not being "ignored by the pros". I'm not even sure what that means. Are you suggesting the owners and league offices of the NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL all huddled together and said "Okay, remember: No one brings a team to Fort Worth. Oh, oh. Here they come. Act like you don't see them."

We are in the top 20 of the U.S. biggest cities.

View Post


I keep hearing this. We're top 20 for like an hour and a half and already it's "Dammit, where's the recognition? Somebody throw us a parade!"

Don't you worry, though. Doug in his cowboy hat and Mike in his Cabella's gimme cap went up yonder to New York and showed them what we're all about.

We got skyscrapers, large population, great entertainment. Wouldn't that be enough to attract a franchise to town?

View Post


Nope.

Maybe the question is "What is FW MISSING that other cities have to bring a team to town?"

View Post


Basically: a willing potential owner or ownership group with enough cash and persuasiveness to win a bid for a pro team when one was up for sale or when one was available through expansion.

In the time that Fort Worth has been such a big-shot high-falutin' top-twenty metropolis, there haven't been that many teams sold or league expansions.


Although a team isn't the heart and soul of a city, it does put the name out there.
If you a big sports fan, when you hear the name of a city like Green Bay or Portland, what comes to mind? (Unless you been there) do you think of its downtown, people, famous landmarks? Nah, you think of the Packers and Trailblazers sport teams.

View Post


So we've heard of Green Bay. We've heard of Foxboro. Are we going to vacation there? If you're CEO, are you going to relocate your headquarters there or open a new plant there because you keep hearing the city's name on ESPN? Green Bay isn't really getting any economic benefit out of the fact that you and I are aware that they exist. I'm not convinced that having their city's name broadcast about 20 weeks out of the year is driving their economy.

Can anyone in the forum give me any reason why we can't have our own home team?  <_<

View Post


We can have one, if one or more significantly well-funded individuals decide to bid on a franchise when one is available, is successful in outbidding competitors from other cities, can soothe any angst the league office might have over protecting the local monopoly of the existing franchise in that sport, and so on. It's not a matter of "Fort Worth" doing something or the league's finally giving us our propers or anything like that.

Also keep in mind that it's not just the size of the city where the team will be "based". It's the size of the metropolitan area from which that city will draw its local fan base. If that metropolitan area has an existing franchise, then the effective population will probably be reduced.

And also note that for at least three of the four major sports we may also have to compete with cities from the Great White North.

#3 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:45 AM

You brought up nearly every point that came to my mind when I originally read this last night. At this point, I believe expansion is completely out as a possibility for attracting a professional franchise. All 4 major professional sports leagues have expanded about as far as possible without affecting the level of competition or completely diluting the skill and talen pool. There's been talk of contraction in baseball recently and, if hockey doesn't get straightened out soon, contraction is almost a certainty. In fact, cross hockey off the list as a possibility. Rampant expansion with teams in the Southern US has probably been a major factor in putting them in the mess they're in in the first place. I wouldn't look for any new teams or existing teams to make their home in the South.

I've mentioned this before, but I would love for somebody in this area with money and influence to get behind an effort to have the Cats become a major league affiliate. It looks like they've been successful thus far and I'm guessing that the elevated talent levels associated with young players trying to make it to the bigs would increase exposure and interest.

#4 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,120 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:42 AM

If you're CEO, are you going to relocate your headquarters there or open a new plant there because you keep hearing the city's name on ESPN?  It's the size of the metropolitan area from which that city will draw its local fan base. If that metropolitan area has an existing franchise, then the effective population will probably be reduced.

View Post



Yes, CEO's and companies as a whole do make relocation and expansion decisions with major sports as "city ammenities" in mind. They are very conscious of that.
Also, it is an extremely powerful branding tool for cities. A city is simply not considered "major" (i.e. economically) if it has no 1st tier pro sports franchise. And yes, that is a problem - because we want our city to be on the list when companies (from start-up entrepreneurial ventures to large firms) are considering expanding or moving to new cities.

One problem is that you are seeing Fort Worth and Dallas as one market. The communities, as distinct, different markets, should have and would ultimately support dueling franchises. The problem is some people's suburban mentality - they want to put everything right in the generic middle of the two cities - rendering both cities losers as each of our distinct identities gets watered down as the focus (at least the focus on sports) turns to our bland, generic mid cities suburbs rather than either city center. That is a big, long term problem for North Texas.

#5 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 03 February 2005 - 02:36 PM

If Jacksonville can do it...I know we can. I have no doubts.

The question is do we want to.

So far, our big money folks (except David McDavid) only want low key equestrian and rodeo events in Fort Worth.

#6 gdvanc

gdvanc
  • Guests

Posted 04 February 2005 - 01:46 AM

Yes, CEO's and companies as a whole do make relocation and expansion decisions with major sports as "city ammenities" in mind.  They are very conscious of that.

View Post


True enough to an extent. A major sports franchise is a city amenity. Well, really a regional amenity. And city or regional amenities, as a part of the quality of life issue, are generally part of the selection criteria.

Still, in general: quality of life is but one of many factors; it is not among the primary factors in the relocation/expansion decision (although it is intertwined with labor, which is a primary factor); amenities are secondary quality of life considerations after "daily life" factors such as availability of affordable housing, cost of living, schools, and commuting options; and no single amenity - football or museum or opera - will be given much weight on its own as it is the entire basket of amenities that is really given consideration.


Also, it is an extremely powerful branding tool for cities.

View Post


How so? I'll agree that it offers a degree of name recognition, but that's not the same as a brand or image.


A city is simply not considered "major" (i.e. economically) if it has no 1st tier pro sports franchise.

View Post


Horse feathers. Not considered economically "major" by whom?


And yes, that is a problem - because we want our city to be on the list when companies (from start-up entrepreneurial ventures to large firms) are considering expanding or moving to new cities. 

View Post


It's always been my understanding that companies from start-up entrepreneurial ventures to large firms make location decisions based first on the availability and cost of the resource needs of the firm: labor, transportation/accessibility (fundamentally that's access to resources, suppliers and/or markets), space, and infrastructure (sometimes considered as part of transportation and space). Things like that.

They will consider the image of the city or region in question if that impacts their business. It generally doesn't.

And I'd like to add, for those following along this far, that companies don't initially pick a city so much as they pick a metropolitan (or possibly rural) area. The city selected as a candidate within that area often comes later. Assuming the city is not at some disadvantage within its area in terms of labor, space, etc., then it starts coming down to amenities and incentives and the like.

One problem is that you are seeing Fort Worth and Dallas as one market.  The communities, as distinct, different markets, should have and would ultimately support dueling franchises.

View Post


Actually, my view of Fort Worth and Dallas as one or separate markets is more flexible than that. Depending on the context, the entire Metroplex can be viewed as one market (although not one identity or culture - that's an entirely different topic) or as any number of markets divided in different ways.

The major sports leagues generally view a market as covering a 75-mile radius. You can see that in their blackout rules and the territorial rights given to existing franchises (which may be a serious obstacle to getting a franchise here). I've heard TV stations define their market as 75 miles as well.

I agree that Fort Worth and Dallas could support competing franchises. I'd like to see it. Where I differ with opinions expressed by others is that 1) I don't think having a pro team is necessary or sufficient for Fort Worth's economic success or the standard/quality of living of its residents, and 2) I don't feel like Fort Worth is a victim of some conspiracy or cosmic injustice or poor civic leadership merely because it lacks a franchise.

The problem is some people's suburban mentality - they want to put everything right in the generic middle of the two cities - rendering both cities losers as each of our distinct identities gets watered down as the focus (at least the focus on sports) turns to our bland, generic mid cities suburbs rather than either city center.  That is a big, long term problem for North Texas.

View Post


The distinct characters/images/personalities of Fort Worth and Dallas are beneficial in my opinion and we should try to maintain it. I simply don't see that as being threatened by Fort Worth's lack of a pro team. You could argue that having one would make us more like Dallas.

#7 ghughes

ghughes
  • Guests

Posted 04 February 2005 - 03:06 PM

You could argue that having one would make us more like Dallas.

:(

#8 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 05 February 2005 - 09:07 AM

There is no investor willing to move a major league sports team to Fort Worth.

There is no league indicating interest.

There is no available team that might relocate.

There is no prospect for a pro team here, and no future to this pointless discussion.

#9 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 05 February 2005 - 12:15 PM

I think everyone already covered why Fort Worth doesn't have a team right now and why there isn't much prospect in the near future. I don't think pro-sports is a necessity to making a city great, it's just a bunch of commercialization and advertising. Look at Austin, it's without a doubt an amazing city, and it has no pro-sports (granted, it does have a large university). If we get a pro team someday, it won't be that big of a deal, and if we don't, it still won't be a big deal. At least, that's how I feel.

#10 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 05 February 2005 - 12:41 PM

The last few posts have summed it up nicely. There are a whole lot of factors way beyond the city's control and there's probably a lot of projects that are more worth of attention and resources.

#11 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 05 February 2005 - 01:33 PM

I never said a pro sports team would make this city GREAT or better than it is. Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio have teams but when you ask different people how they feel about those cities, Im sure their sports status is not gonna sum up thier opinions of those places. It's just that when you think of big cities, sport teams and thier stadiums are just one of the characteristics some people think of. Of course you don't have to have a team to be a big city duh, but it would be NICE to dream right? I read some posts with people wishing FW had more or taller skyscrapers but i woulnd't say that is pointless to disscus on this forum.

#12 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 05 February 2005 - 01:59 PM

:laugh: Oh by the way, to those of you that think FW is immune to pro sports.....think again. WE DO HAVE PRO SPORTS!!!!! lol

Is anyone aware of /////NASCAR?????
Is anyone also aware that we have the 2nd largest sports facility in the country 3rd in the world and that the FW track with permanent seating of 150,000+ and total seating incl infield capacity totals 200,000+ gets packed during the cup race.

FW as a city had no control over it? Ha
As I recall, when Burton Smith considered a track in TX back in mid-late 90's didnt FW jump at the chance along with Dallas and San Antonio and such? I'm sure FW leaders did that tax incentives or whatever those things are called to lure the track to far north FW. So when the Cowboys decided to relocate, why didnt FW jump at the NFL bandwagon as Arlignton and Grapevine did? They could of kept the "Dallas" name, but Im sure if FW would of took a bid, the citizens would of voted to bring "America's Team" to town just as Arlignton voters eagerly did. Didn't you see those TV/Radio ads promising the HUGE benifits like jobs and economical growth? :)

#13 Call me Arch Stanton

Call me Arch Stanton

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 369 posts

Posted 06 February 2005 - 02:47 PM

The success of NASCAR and the IRL in Fort Worth has been spectacular and I would suspect largely a surprise. We put more fans in the seats to watch Nextel Cup qualifying than some Cup races draw at other venues. It's spectacular the support we give to the sport, and it's fitting that we get a second Cup race starting next year.

On the topic of Fort Worth and the Cowboys, I can't help but think how easy it would've been to knock down a bunch of vacant warehouses at the corner of Main and Pennsylvania and locate the stadium in a downtown environment. Imagine a Super Bowl party in Sundance Square. The possibilities would've been endless. With the barren surroundings in Arlington, their chances of hosting a Super Bowl could be hurt by this year's complaints that Jacksonville (home of this year's Super Bowl, today) is too "spread out." Dear god, what are people going to think when they have to drive thirty minutes east or west just to find any real nightlife? It may not go well.

But hey, the Rangers and their 81 events per year haven't brought any retail or nightlife to the area surrounding the Ballpark, maybe eight football games a year will :)

#14 utamav91

utamav91

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 08 February 2005 - 02:05 PM

what are people going to think when they have to drive thirty minutes east or west just to find any real nightlife? It may not go well.

But hey, the Rangers and their 81 events per year haven't brought any retail or nightlife to the area surrounding the Ballpark, maybe eight football games a year will  :)

View Post



You mean the large groups of national chain-owned restaurants along Cooper or Copeland aren't exciting enough? hehe ;) ;) ;)

#15 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 08 February 2005 - 03:56 PM

The best way to promote Fort Worth sports is to support the major college program here -- TCU.

They have a great forum over at www.killerfrogs.com with a lot of complaints/ideas about media coverage, the Star-Telegram and how to promote local support.

#16 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,120 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 08 February 2005 - 10:46 PM

A city is simply not considered "major" (i.e. economically) if it has no 1st tier pro sports franchise.

View Post


Horse feathers. Not considered economically "major" by whom?

View Post



Okay, please name a city in the US that is generally considered a major economic city that entirely lacks a 1st tier sports team.


In case you were going to say Austin (see below)

And to Johnny's question - the major barrier to Austin's getting one is UT. Presumably a pro sports franchise would cut into local $ available from fans, which would have a large, negative impact on their athletic department.

#17 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,120 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 08 February 2005 - 10:57 PM

Yes, CEO's and companies as a whole do make relocation and expansion decisions with major sports as "city ammenities" in mind.  They are very conscious of that.

View Post


True enough to an extent. A major sports franchise is a city amenity. Well, really a regional amenity. And city or regional amenities, as a part of the quality of life issue, are generally part of the selection criteria.

Still, in general: quality of life is but one of many factors; it is not among the primary factors in the relocation/expansion decision (although it is intertwined with labor, which is a primary factor); amenities are secondary quality of life considerations after "daily life" factors such as availability of affordable housing, cost of living, schools, and commuting options; and no single amenity - football or museum or opera - will be given much weight on its own as it is the entire basket of amenities that is really given consideration.


Also, it is an extremely powerful branding tool for cities.

View Post


How so? I'll agree that it offers a degree of name recognition, but that's not the same as a brand or image.


A city is simply not considered "major" (i.e. economically) if it has no 1st tier pro sports franchise.

View Post

They will consider the image of the city or region in question if that impacts their business. It generally doesn't.

And I'd like to add, for those following along this far, that companies don't initially pick a city so much as they pick a metropolitan (or possibly rural) area. The city selected as a candidate within that area often comes later. Assuming the city is not at some disadvantage within its area in terms of labor, space, etc., then it starts coming down to amenities and incentives and the like.

View Post


I think your assumptions about the factors affecting economic development only tell part of the story. When you're talking about bringing warehouse jobs to town I think you are correct, however I'm talking about factors that affect the percieved quality of life in Fort Worth in the eyes of highly educated, highly skilled workers. Yes, sports franchises are just one item on a list of "amenities" skilled workers expect in a city to which they might relocate, but it is not to be ignored.

You ought to check out a book called Rise of the Creative Class by Richard Florida.

You are correct in that the mere presence of a major sports team does not generate any specific brand identiy for a city, however it has an amazing ability to establish strong brand salience. This sounds trivial, I know, however when companies make site selection decisions for their companies, they often (not always) consider a very short list based on very little information - and cities without any brand salience definitely get left off the list. Why? They are simply forgotten.

#18 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 09 February 2005 - 08:27 PM

I completely agree that pro sports teams are important to economic development.

That's why having the Rangers and Cowboys in Arlington is also important to Fort Worth.

If the Cowboys had moved somewhere east of Rockwall, it would have been disastrous to our prestige.

But there is simply no prospect of adding a second local basketball or hockey team in Fort Worth.

#19 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 11 February 2005 - 05:22 PM

Urbndwlr Posted Feb 8 2005, 11:46 PM
Okay, please name a city in the US that is generally considered a major economic city that entirely lacks a 1st tier sports team.


Dang! You sure have a point.
I just looked up a list of the top big cities in population and a majority of them have teams. Ft.Worth ranks #20 and every city 1 - 19 with the exception of Austin DOES have a team! :blink:

Take a look at these places and you will find a team of any franchise there...

1. New York 2. Los Angeles 3. Chicago 4. Houston 5. Philadelphia 6. Phoenix 7. San Diego 8. San Antonio 9. Dallas 10. Detroit 11. San Jose 12. Indianapolis 13. Jacksonville 14. San Fransisco 15. Columbus 16. Austin(none) 17. Memphis 18. Baltimore 19. Milwaukee 20. Fort Worth(well, Nascar at least) :D
Cities 21 - 30 ,with the exeption of El Paso and Oklahoma City, also have pro teams. Beyond 30 there are still more cities with more teams. Gee! :mad:

#20 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 11 February 2005 - 05:28 PM

In half those cities, the sports teams play in a suburb.

Just like ours.

The idea that we "lack" a sports team is ridiculous. We only lack our name on a team

#21 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 11 February 2005 - 05:41 PM

Buck Posted Today, 06:28 PM
In half those cities, the sports teams play in a suburb.

Just like ours.

The idea that we "lack" a sports team is ridiculous. We only lack our name on a team


Just the other day I was talking to a friend of mine on the same idea. I asked if he'd like to see a pro team in Ft Worth. He responded "I basically consider the Rangers a FW team"

So since the team is called the "TEXAS" Rangers, I guess we can call it OUR HOME TEAM huh? :blink:

#22 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 11 February 2005 - 05:48 PM

Urbndwlr Posted Feb 8 2005, 11:46 PM
Okay, please name a city in the US that is generally considered a major economic city that entirely lacks a 1st tier sports team.


Dang! You sure have a point.
I just looked up a list of the top big cities in population and a majority of them have teams. Ft.Worth ranks #20 and every city 1 - 19 with the exception of Austin DOES have a team! :blink:

Take a look at these places and you will find a team of any franchise there...

1. New York 2. Los Angeles 3. Chicago 4. Houston 5. Philadelphia 6. Phoenix 7. San Diego 8. San Antonio 9. Dallas 10. Detroit 11. San Jose 12. Indianapolis 13. Jacksonville 14. San Fransisco 15. Columbus 16. Austin(none) 17. Memphis 18. Baltimore 19. Milwaukee 20. Fort Worth(well, Nascar at least) :D
Cities 21 - 30 ,with the exeption of El Paso and Oklahoma City, also have pro teams. Beyond 30 there are still more cities with more teams. Gee! :mad:

View Post

I think you're missing a few points. First of all, Fort Worth is brand spanking new to the top 20 list. The rest of those cities have been there at least 15 years, most of them longer. This not only has given them more time to garner recognition, but it means these cities have been big (both population-wise and economically) for a while. Why does Fort Worth need to get teams right away when we just landed spot #20 a year ago? Give the reality of our size a little time to sink in and maybe the whole "we're number 20, where are our teams?" argument would be a little more valid.

#23 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 11 February 2005 - 06:03 PM

Jonnyrules23 Posted Today, 06:48 PM
I think you're missing a few points. First of all, Fort Worth is brand spanking new to the top 20 list. The rest of those cities have been there at least 15 years, most of them longer. This not only has given them more time to garner recognition, but it means these cities have been big (both population-wise and economically) for a while. Why does Fort Worth need to get teams right away when we just landed spot #20 a year ago? Give the reality of our size a little time to sink in and maybe the whole "we're number 20, where are our teams?" argument would be a little more valid.


Sure we just hit the #20 spot and the rest have been there for some time, but what about Orlando? It's #94 and not gaining on us anytime soon and they got NBA and check this out.....Green Bay which didn't even make the top 100 has NFL. This means we are way way wayyyyyy over due a team lol

#24 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 11 February 2005 - 10:52 PM

Orlando proper may be quite smaller, but it is a fairly large metropolitan area. Nevermind the fact that it is one of the most popular tourist destinations in the US, if not the world.

#25 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 13 February 2005 - 05:06 PM

If Orlando were next door to Dallas, it would not have its own team.

The only history of two-team or twin-city markets is with New York, LA-Anaheim, Chicago and Washington-Baltimore.

#26 gdvanc

gdvanc
  • Guests

Posted 16 February 2005 - 01:16 AM

Okay, please name a city in the US that is generally considered a major economic city that entirely lacks a 1st tier sports team. 

In case you were going to say Austin (see below)

View Post


Hm, I guess it depends on how you define "major economic city" and "lacks a 1st tier sports team" (does it have to be in the city limits, in the MSA, in the CMSA, have the city name, ...?).

I'd probably say Newark, unless you consider the Nets or Devils as their team (although they play in East Rutherford and their names don't mention Newark - making them a bit like the Rangers are to FW; we have to be consistent.). New Haven. Hartford. These all have GMP's higher than the Fort Worth-Arlington MSA.

Las Vegas. It's GMP is a bit higher than San Antonio's and a bit shy of 20% higher than Austin's.

Yes, and Austin. Why not Austin? I'm not sure which of your statements "see below" refers to.


And to Johnny's question - the major barrier to Austin's getting one is UT.  Presumably a pro sports franchise would cut into local $ available from fans, which would have a large, negative impact on their athletic department.

View Post


Interesting. Never heard that. Where did you come across it? I question it given the athletic department's income sources. I think they'd have to lose a lot of fans to the pro team for it to have a large, negative impact on the department's budget - and I don't think they'd lose a lot of fans. Sure, fans have a limited ability to spend on entertainment, but I think they'd cut back in other areas for the most part.

Also, UT hosts the AFL Austin Wranglers in the Frank Erwin Center.

#27 gdvanc

gdvanc
  • Guests

Posted 16 February 2005 - 02:03 AM

I think your assumptions about the factors affecting economic development only tell part of the story.  When you're talking about bringing warehouse jobs to town I think you are correct, however I'm talking about factors that affect the percieved quality of life in Fort Worth in the eyes of highly educated, highly skilled workers.

View Post


Actually, those aren't my assumptions. These aren't things I just made up or that I'm guessing.

They're taken from research and industry surveys. And, no, they didn't just cover companies expanding or relocating warehouse jobs.

And highly educated, highly skilled workers considering moving to the area probably don't care much about the Fort Worth-Dallas rivalry. They, and the people making the expansion/relocation decisions, would consider the pro teams in Dallas as being easily available as an amenity for people living and working in Fort Worth.

Yes, sports franchises are just one item on a list of "amenities" skilled workers expect in a city to which they might relocate, but it is not to be ignored. 

View Post


I disagree. I think they can be safely ignored - especially in Fort Worth's case.

You ought to check out a book called Rise of the Creative Class by Richard Florida. 

View Post


I haven't read the book, but I have a pretty good understanding of his ideas. I have read some of his other papers and I've read articles by him and interviews of him in the WSJ, Fast Company, HBJ, and so on.

I admit that I don't get as worked up about his ideas as some do. There is truth in them, but a lot of the truth is not really that new or groundbreaking. And his web site is really annoying, but that's another matter. Looks like the Tony Robbins of regional growth.

It's interesting that you bring him up, though. In the things I've read by him, he's been pretty consistent in downplaying the importance of professional sports. In the Fast Company interview from a few years back, for instance, he specifically mentions Austin as an example of a city that "gets it". A quote from the interview:


"While professional sports are seen more and more as a way to achieve 'major league' status and attract talent, our data suggests that there is little relationship between these big-ticket venues and high-tech workers. Many successful high-tech regions, notably Austin and Raleigh-Durham, have little or no professional-sports presence. The reason, I think, is that we're seeing the replacement of spectating with participating.

Knowledge workers don't want to devote an entire Sunday to watching football. These people are active. They want to participate. They don't want to stand on the sidelines. A lot of cities believe that they'll make it in the new economy if they get a professional sports team and build a downtown mall. They couldn't be more wrong."


Emphasis added.

You are correct in that the mere presence of a major sports team does not generate any specific brand identiy for a city, however it has an amazing ability to establish strong brand salience.

View Post


I disagree that it has any amazing branding abilities. It is a way to get the name out there, but it is only one of many ways and it doesn't really do much to associate the city name with a positive feeling or image - which is an important part of successful branding. (Possibly an exception to that if the team is very successful.)

This sounds trivial, I know, however when companies make site selection decisions for their companies, they often (not always) consider a very short list based on very little information - and cities without any brand salience definitely get left off the list.  Why?  They are simply forgotten.

View Post


Companies spending millions (billions?) of dollars to expand or relocate do not just WAG at it. They do their homework. In many cases, they hire a firm specializing in expansions. They understand their resource needs and use readily available economic research - not Sports Center - to develop the initial list of potential cities. It is generally a thorough process and not dependent on anyone's ability to remember the name of a city. Give the guys some credit.



I try to be fairly open-minded about this. If you have some sort of research or something to back you up, that's fine. I thought sports were economically important when Arlington was voting on whether to build a new stadium for the Rangers (I voted in favor). It just seemed obvious. I came across a couple of well-reasoned arguments to the contrary, though, and decided to actually try to study it. The more I read, the more I was convinced that public investment in sports stadiums is generally bad fiscal policy. A little bit more studying convinced me that the economic impact of pro sports is not nearly as big as the pols and papers claim.

I can change my mind back, but it will take reasonably solid economic research. Peer-reviewed is preferred. Studies commissioned by city councils don't count. :-)

#28 gdvanc

gdvanc
  • Guests

Posted 16 February 2005 - 02:09 AM

I completely agree that pro sports teams are important to economic development.

View Post

I disagree. Respectfully, of course.

That's why having the Rangers and Cowboys in Arlington is also important to Fort Worth.

View Post

I think of it as a bullet item that's a "nice-to-have". Especially since it didn't cost FW anything to get them there.

If the Cowboys had moved somewhere east of Rockwall, it would have been disastrous to our prestige.

View Post

That far east would have made them less of a selling point, but I don't see how it could be considered disastrous.

But there is simply no prospect of adding a second local basketball or hockey team in Fort Worth.

View Post

Yeah, not likely at all. I think we'll manage, though.

#29 tcole

tcole

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 16 February 2005 - 05:13 AM

Hey Donnie:

New Haven and Hartford both have GMPs higher than FTW/Arlington? I never would have suspected that. Post the source for that if you do not mind. I'd like to peruse it. I had really never considered something like GMP in this argument and in some other threads where our population growth and/or expectations have been highlighted.

#30 gdvanc

gdvanc
  • Guests

Posted 16 February 2005 - 06:22 AM

Hey Donnie:

New Haven and Hartford both have GMPs higher than FTW/Arlington?  I never would have suspected that.  Post the source for that if you do not mind.  I'd like to peruse it.  I had really never considered something like GMP in this argument and in some other threads where our population growth and/or expectations have been highlighted.

View Post


Gladly, Thomas. This is the closest thing I've found to something that gives an idea about the economic strength of a city or msa. It comes from the U.S. Council of Mayors; not sure about the organization, but hopefully the research (by DRI-WEFA or GlobalInsight) is good.

Top 100 U.S. Metro Economies (pdf file)

There are a few other reports available here.

#31 tcole

tcole

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 16 February 2005 - 09:06 AM

Thanks Donnie.

Interesting list. Would not have expected ATL to have a greater GMP than DAL much less STL and DEN greater than SJO. Would love to see their underlying assumptions and raw data.

#32 gdvanc

gdvanc
  • Guests

Posted 16 February 2005 - 10:51 AM

tc - I'm not sure how Global Insight calculates it. I know the challenge is that output isn't generally reported below the state level. (I believe that BEA has kicked around the idea of doing so, though.)

I recently read a 1999 study called "Educational attainment and metropolitan growth" by Gottlieb and Fogarty of Case Wester Reserve University's Center for Regional Economic Issues.


They calculated GMP as follows:

+ For each industry represented in a metro area, calculate the metro's output in that industry (at the one-digit SIC level) by dividing the state output in that industry by the state earnings in that industry and multiplying by the metro earnings in that industry. The assumption is that the metro's ratio of output to earnings in a particular industry is essentially equivalent to the state's.

+ Calculate GMP for the metro by summing up the calculated industry-specific output for each industry in that metro.

Pretty clever, I say.

Rutgers' Center for Urban Policy Research used a similar method in their "State of the Nation's Cities" database:

"32. The limiting factor in estimating gross metro product (GMP) is the availability of data on
output. In the U.S., the smallest areal unit for officially released data on output is at the
state level (gross state product or GSP). We derive GMP by assuming that sector-
specific productivity levels are constant across all parts of each respective state -- i.e.,
that the GSP-to-earnings ratio for a state prevails within each of the state's metropolitan
areas. We calculate GMP estimates by multiplying metropolitan earnings by sector-
specific productivity levels at the state level and summing across sectors. Both GSP and
earnings data are available at approximately the two-digit SIC level. We adjusted these
datasets for comparability, yielding a total of 60 industrial sectors for which
productivity estimates were calculated. Consequently, the GMP figures not only
account for state differences in productivity, but also for differences in the industrial
mix between the metro and non-metro portions of each state."



Perhaps Global Insights uses a similar method.

#33 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 20 February 2005 - 09:02 PM

Can anyone tell me if the AFL (Arena Football League) is on the same level of pro sports as the NFL, NBA, etc... ?
I was wondering since I've noticed some games been shown on NBC making it look legit. I'm sure everyone is familiar with the Dallas Desparados right? Anyone remember or have ever heard of the Fort Worth Cavalry? Think early '90s.

Fort Worth Cavalry link with arlicle below & logo pic

Wikipedia.com article: Fort Worth Cavalry
The Fort Worth Cavalry were an Arena Football League team which operated for a single season, 1994. The Arena organization did not want to abandon the idea of having a franchise in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, a major media market, after the demise of the Dallas Texans (1990-1993), and granted a new franchise to an ownership group in Fort Worth.

The fact that the Cavalry played their home games at the Tarrant County Convention Center, which was poorly suited to Arena Football, or other team sports for that matter, probably contributed to their lack of success financially. On the field, they were somewhat more successful, advancing to the first round of the playoffs after their only campaign. They lost to Orlando and were disbanded shortly thereafter

#34 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 20 February 2005 - 09:19 PM

FW Cavalry Stats

#35 ILoveAJuggalo1569

ILoveAJuggalo1569

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Everman
  • Interests:Playing softball!

Posted 20 February 2005 - 09:38 PM

i think fort worth should have more sports because everyone thinks of it as a hick town and we should be able to show them that thats not all everyone here is that we can actually do more than just rodeo and stuff
Everman High School C/O "06"

#36 ILoveAJuggalo1569

ILoveAJuggalo1569

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Everman
  • Interests:Playing softball!

Posted 20 February 2005 - 09:42 PM

drklts is my baby!!!!!!!!!! i love u sweetie
Everman High School C/O "06"

#37 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 21 February 2005 - 10:00 AM

Can anyone tell me if the AFL (Arena Football League) is on the same level of pro sports as the NFL, NBA, etc... ?
I was wondering since I've noticed some games been shown on NBC making it look legit. I'm sure everyone is familiar with the Dallas Desparados right? Anyone remember or have ever heard of the Fort Worth Cavalry? Think early '90s.

Fort Worth Cavalry link with arlicle below & logo pic

Wikipedia.com article: Fort Worth Cavalry
The Fort Worth Cavalry were an Arena Football League team which operated for a single season, 1994. The Arena organization did not want to abandon the idea of having a franchise in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, a major media market, after the demise of the Dallas Texans (1990-1993), and granted a new franchise to an ownership group in Fort Worth.

The fact that the Cavalry played their home games at the Tarrant County Convention Center, which was poorly suited to Arena Football, or other team sports for that matter, probably contributed to their lack of success financially. On the field, they were somewhat more successful, advancing to the first round of the playoffs after their only campaign. They lost to Orlando and were disbanded shortly thereafter

View Post


I went to a few games and thought it would last longer than one season.

Jerral Jones could have put his AFL franchise in Fort Worth, but of course he doesn't give a $%&* about Fort Worth, Arlington, HEB, Grapevine, Southlake, Keller, Colleyville or any other part of Tarrant County.

#38 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 21 February 2005 - 12:47 PM

The Cavalry moved here at the last minute after another franchise collapsed.

Fort Worth was a last-minute choice for a short-term location, and the team never really had a chance to do much marketing.

#39 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 21 February 2005 - 01:21 PM

Hey Everybody

I'm suprised there isn't a thread about a desire to see a pro team in Fort Worth. I noticed the topic does get brought up from time to time on other threads, but not one dedicated entirely to it.
Now I got to ask everyone "Do you see a pro team in FW's future?"
We are bigger than most cities that already have teams. So why are we only settling for minor league (Brahmas, Cats)?
Of course Dallas has its teams, but even Arlington (as soon as the Cowboys move in) will have a total of two!  :?:
Why are we being ignored by the pros? We are in the top 20 of the U.S. biggest cities. We got skyscrapers, large population, great entertainment. Wouldn't that be enough to attract a franchise to town?
Maybe the question is "What is FW MISSING that other cities have to bring a team to town?" It seems everytime I ask people around me why we don't have pro sports in FW, all I get is the negatives responses. Gee, where are all the positive people at? lol

Although a team isn't the heart and soul of a city, it does put the name out there.
If you a big sports fan, when you hear the name of a city like Green Bay or Portland, what comes to mind? (Unless you been there) do you think of its downtown, people, famous landmarks? Nah, you think of the Packers and Trailblazers sport teams.

Can anyone in the forum give me any reason why we can't have our own home team?  <_<

View Post


Sad but true, Memphis has more to offer than FW. That goes for entertainment, sports, history, you name it. San Antonio too will get another pro team before we do, and they are maxed out for the big three in sports, excellent HS football revenues. Our location and unwillingness from the city council will keep us dragging as usual. Your quandry is the exact fuel to my theory that the downtown living RE is all hype and no show for the next 10-20 years. Our best shot is with Colonial, next to that is a Dog Show, or a "rodeo". I don't consider it a true and big rodeo town when you are able to trail livestock down your inner city streets. Then they won't even have a free taco Cowboy Breakfast like they do it in San Antonio, a real town.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#40 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 21 February 2005 - 01:27 PM

Hey Donnie:

New Haven and Hartford both have GMPs higher than FTW/Arlington?  I never would have suspected that.  Post the source for that if you do not mind.  I'd like to peruse it.  I had really never considered something like GMP in this argument and in some other threads where our population growth and/or expectations have been highlighted.

View Post


They also have Ivy League schools, sustainable housing market for centuries, and are within driving distance to the Big Apple, Boston, and Canada. Sort of like a Northern San Antonio, pro teams close to state cap Austin, sustainable housing market, lotta drive from the city c, lot of history, hmmmmm. San Antonio also has the Alamo and the Harvard of the South, Trinity U.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#41 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 21 February 2005 - 01:29 PM

The Cavalry moved here at the last minute after another franchise collapsed.

Fort Worth was a last-minute choice for a short-term location, and the team never really had a chance to do much marketing.

View Post

We had the San ANtonio Gunslingers once, didn't do much. Gone.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#42 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 21 February 2005 - 02:20 PM

Jerral Jones could have put his AFL franchise in Fort Worth, but of course he doesn't give a $%&* about Fort Worth, Arlington, HEB, Grapevine, Southlake, Keller, Colleyville or any other part of Tarrant County.


His opinion of FW or Tarrant County had no bearing at all on placing the AFL franchise in Dallas. There were already two appropriately sized arenas available in Dallas, so the Desparados play there. AFL teams are now using the 20K seat stadiums used by NBA and NHL teams, so the existing arenas and the planned arena in FW are not appropriately sized for this current incarnation of arena football.

#43 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 21 February 2005 - 04:50 PM

Jerral Jones could have put his AFL franchise in Fort Worth, but of course he doesn't give a $%&* about Fort Worth, Arlington, HEB, Grapevine, Southlake, Keller, Colleyville or any other part of Tarrant County.


His opinion of FW or Tarrant County had no bearing at all on placing the AFL franchise in Dallas. There were already two appropriately sized arenas available in Dallas, so the Desparados play there. AFL teams are now using the 20K seat stadiums used by NBA and NHL teams, so the existing arenas and the planned arena in FW are not appropriately sized for this current incarnation of arena football.

View Post


I guess we'll never know. <_<

#44 lobster

lobster

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 447 posts
  • Location:downtown Fort Worth ;]

Posted 21 February 2005 - 05:12 PM

Although a team isn't the heart and soul of a city, it does put the name out there.
If you a big sports fan, when you hear the name of a city like Green Bay or Portland, what comes to mind? (Unless you been there) do you think of its downtown, people, famous landmarks? Nah, you think of the Packers and Trailblazers sport teams.

View Post


<_< you serious? Play a lil' word association game with one yo' friends and ask them to start naming a list of words that they feel are related to Portland.. I bet the word "Trailblazers" aren't emitted until about 25th or 26th on the list... right between "Lumberjack" and "Sally Struthers"...

#45 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 21 February 2005 - 06:13 PM

I guess we'll never know. <_<


What exactly will we never know?

#46 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 21 February 2005 - 09:02 PM

Jerral Jones could have put his AFL franchise in Fort Worth, but of course he doesn't give a $%&* about Fort Worth, Arlington, HEB, Grapevine, Southlake, Keller, Colleyville or any other part of Tarrant County.


His opinion of FW or Tarrant County had no bearing at all on placing the AFL franchise in Dallas. There were already two appropriately sized arenas available in Dallas, so the Desparados play there. AFL teams are now using the 20K seat stadiums used by NBA and NHL teams, so the existing arenas and the planned arena in FW are not appropriately sized for this current incarnation of arena football.

View Post


I guess we'll never know. <_<

View Post



The article I posted also mentioned the convention center being unsuitable for arena football or any other sport for that matter. First the city loses alot of national conventions due to lack of space at the outdated center, so after decades of putting it off, FW finaly renovates it and expand the convention space/ballrooms. IF THEY WOULD OF DONE THAT TO THE ARENA (expansion) a decade ago we "might" of still had the Cavalry here too. Word has it that they rather tear it down the arena on their "final phase" of renovating the center. Thats ridiculous! The Cavalry was proof we COULD and probably CAN AGAIN attract a pro team, but just like the lost conventions of the past....add sports to that list of things FW failed to keep due to that old underbuilt center.

Think about it tho, imagin waking up on a saturday morning and tuning in to NBC5 and watching the AFL and seeing Fort Worth play on a national broadcast. Maybe against the Desparados! That would of been SWEEEEEEEEEEET! :?:

#47 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 21 February 2005 - 09:03 PM

Although a team isn't the heart and soul of a city, it does put the name out there.
If you a big sports fan, when you hear the name of a city like Green Bay or Portland, what comes to mind? (Unless you been there) do you think of its downtown, people, famous landmarks? Nah, you think of the Packers and Trailblazers sport teams.

View Post


<_< you serious? Play a lil' word association game with one yo' friends and ask them to start naming a list of words that they feel are related to Portland.. I bet the word "Trailblazers" aren't emitted until about 25th or 26th on the list... right between "Lumberjack" and "Sally Struthers"...

View Post


don't forget, Beaver.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#48 Sam Stone

Sam Stone

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Overton, then Monticello, now expat in OC, CA

Posted 22 February 2005 - 07:29 AM

Bud Kennedy has an interesting piece today:
http://www.dfw.com/m...al/10960754.htm

We all might have been missing something. I'm not an autoracing fan, but it is a sport. We don't have a team, but we do have a big venue. Maybe if we are willing to redefine "major league sporting venue" we can accept that we already have one.

#49 lobster

lobster

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 447 posts
  • Location:downtown Fort Worth ;]

Posted 22 February 2005 - 09:45 AM

I think the huge buzz kill on the whole deal is that Dallas already has a franchise for all the major sports .. and with MLB being in Arlington, there's no chance FW would get one 15 miles away... Only the super huge megatropolis can warrant having two NFL teams (NYC), two NHL teams (NYC), two NBA teams (NYC, LA), or two MLB teams (NYC, Chicago) ...

I really don't know why FW didn't step up to the plate when Irving was giving up the Cowboys though.. During a city council presentation in 2003 I asked if FW will ever try to acquire the Cowboys and Jim Lane -- "Head of the Fort Worth Sports [something something] Committee" -- responded "trust me, we've been trying".. Eh, I'm not a huge Arlington connoisseur, but it's fair to say anything like that coming to Tarrant County makes it more Fort Worth's than Dallas' ;)

#50 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 22 February 2005 - 10:03 AM

I think the huge buzz kill on the whole deal is that Dallas already has a franchise for all the major sports .. and with MLB being in Arlington, there's no chance FW would get one 15 miles away... Only the super huge megatropolis can warrant having two NFL teams (NYC), two NHL teams (NYC), two NBA teams (NYC, LA), or two MLB teams (NYC, Chicago) ...

I really don't know why FW didn't step up to the plate when Irving was giving up the Cowboys though.. During a city council presentation in 2003 I asked if FW will ever try to acquire the Cowboys and Jim Lane -- "Head of the Fort Worth Sports [something something] Committee" -- responded "trust me, we've been trying".. Eh, I'm not a huge Arlington connoisseur, but it's fair to say anything like that coming to Tarrant County makes it more Fort Worth's than Dallas'  :P

View Post



What about SF-Oak which are less than 10 miles apart? ;)

Our populations are similar.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users